United States Patent and Trademark Office

The legal basis for the United States patent system is the Copyright Clause in Section 8 of Article I of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the power to grant patents and copyrights on a national basis. Trademark law, on the other hand, is considered to be authorized by the Commerce Clause.{{cite news | title = The United States Constitution |url=https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140125111307/http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html | archive-date=January 25, 2014| publisher = The U.S. National Archives | date = January 2014 | access-date = February 19, 2014 }}

The Congress shall have Power ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

The USPTO maintains a permanent, interdisciplinary historical record of all U.S. patent applications in order to fulfill objectives outlined in the United States Constitution. The PTO's mission is to promote "industrial and technological progress in the United States and strengthen the national economy" by:

• Administering the laws relating to patents and trademarks;
• Advising the secretary of commerce, the president of the United States, and the administration on patent, trademark, and copyright protection; and
• Providing advice on the trade-related aspects of intellectual property.

Patent Office relief on the Herbert C. Hoover Building.JPG | Relief representing the Patent Office at the Herbert C. Hoover Building

14 12 31 US Patent Office Sign Alexandria VA 01.jpg | Signboard of U.S. Patent Office Alexandria

The USPTO is headquartered at the Alexandria Campus, consisting of 11 buildings in a city-like development surrounded by ground floor retail and high rise residential buildings between the Metro stations of King Street station (the main search building is two blocks due south of the King Street station) and Eisenhower Avenue station where the actual Alexandria Campus is located between Duke Street (on the North) to Eisenhower Avenue (on the South), and between John Carlyle Street (on the East) to Elizabeth Lane (on the West) in Alexandria, Virginia.{{cite web|url=http://usptocareers.gov/Pages/NewEmployee/Campus.aspx|title=USPTO Campus|website=usptocareers.gov|access-date=May 6, 2018|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121014021642/http://www.usptocareers.gov/Pages/NewEmployee/Campus.aspx|archive-date=October 14, 2012}}{{cite web|url=http://www.uspto.gov/about/contacts/locations/map_alex.jsp|title=Visiting the USPTO – Map – Alexandria Headquarters |last=Public Information Services Group |date=September 27, 2009 |website=USPTO|access-date=May 6, 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150108121523/http://www.uspto.gov/about/contacts/locations/map_alex.jsp|archive-date=January 8, 2015}}{{cite web|url=http://www.uspto.gov/image/campus_map.jpg|title=USPTO Alexandria Campus |website=USPTO|access-date=May 6, 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170429162122/https://www.uspto.gov/image/campus_map.jpg|archive-date=April 29, 2017}} An additional building in Arlington, Virginia, was opened in 2009.

The USPTO was expected by 2014 to open its first ever satellite offices in Detroit, Dallas, Denver, and Silicon Valley to reduce backlog and reflect regional industrial strengths.{{cite web|url=http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Silicon-Valley-wins-in-securing-U-S-patent-office-3682845.php|title=Silicon Valley wins in securing U.S. patent office|date=July 4, 2012|website=SFGate|access-date=May 6, 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171113211718/http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Silicon-Valley-wins-in-securing-U-S-patent-office-3682845.php|archive-date=November 13, 2017}} The first satellite office opened in Detroit on July 13, 2012.{{cite web |url=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2011-03-01/pdf/CREC-2011-03-01-pt1-PgS1071.pdf#page=3 |title=Patent Reform Act of 2011 Amendment |work=Congressional Record 112th Congress (2011–2012) |format=pdf |access-date=March 5, 2011 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121106140855/http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2011-03-01/pdf/CREC-2011-03-01-pt1-PgS1071.pdf#page=3 |archive-date=November 6, 2012 }}{{cite press release|url=http://www.uspto.gov/news/pr/2010/10_65.jsp|title=USPTO to Open First Ever Satellite Office in Detroit|publisher=U.S. Patent and Trademark Office|format=pdf|date=December 16, 2010|access-date=July 14, 2012|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120630044451/http://www.uspto.gov/news/pr/2010/10_65.jsp|archive-date=June 30, 2012}}{{cite web |url=http://www.mlive.com/business/index.ssf/2012/07/detroit_beats_silicon_valley_i.html |title=Detroit beats Silicon Valley in opening first-ever patent office outside Washington, D.C. |first1=Melissa |last1=Anders |date=July 13, 2012 |publisher=MLive.com |access-date=July 13, 2012 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120719102121/http://www.mlive.com/business/index.ssf/2012/07/detroit_beats_silicon_valley_i.html |archive-date=July 19, 2012 }}{{cite news |url=http://www.inc.com/hot-spots-detroit/eric-markowitz/what-does-a-patent-office-mean-for-detroit.html |first1=Eric |last1=Markowitz |publisher=Inc.com |date=March 1, 2012 |title=What Does a Patent Office Mean For Detroit? |access-date=July 10, 2012 |archive-date=May 22, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120522185649/http://www.inc.com/hot-spots-detroit/eric-markowitz/what-does-a-patent-office-mean-for-detroit.html |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120711/BIZ/207110377/1361/Patent-office-prepares-to-open-Detroit-location |date=July 11, 2012 |title=Patent office prepares to open Detroit location |agency=Associated Press |work=The Detroit News |location=Detroit, Michigan |access-date=July 11, 2012 }}{{Dead link|date=May 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} In 2013, due to the budget sequestration, the satellite office for Silicon Valley, which is home to one of the nation's top patent-producing cities, was put on hold.{{cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=217869885|title=Silicon Valley Patent Office Shelved|website=NPR|agency=Associated Press|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130922153713/http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=217869885|archive-date=September 22, 2013|access-date=April 3, 2018}} However, renovation and infrastructure updates continued after the sequestration, and the Silicon Valley location opened in the San Jose City Hall in 2015.{{cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/uspto-locations/silicon-valley-california|title=Silicon Valley U.S. Patent and Trademark Office|first=Silicon Valley Regional|last=Office|publisher=United States Patent and Trademark Office|access-date=May 6, 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150108070659/http://www.uspto.gov/about/locations/Silicon_Valley.jsp|archive-date=January 8, 2015}}

{{As of|2009|9|30|df=US}}, the end of the U.S. government's fiscal year, the PTO had 9,716 employees, nearly all of whom are based at its five-building headquarters complex in Alexandria. Of those, 6,242 were patent examiners (almost all of whom were assigned to examine utility patents; only 99 were assigned to examine design patents) and 388 were trademark examining attorneys; the rest are support staff.{{cite web |url=http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/2009/2009annualreport.pdf |title=USPTO Performance and Accountability Report Fiscal Year 2009 |publisher=United States Patent and Trademark Office |page=140 |access-date=January 16, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110103204805/http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/2009/2009annualreport.pdf |archive-date=January 3, 2011 }} While the agency has noticeably grown in recent years, the rate of growth was far slower in fiscal 2009 than in the recent past; this is borne out by data from fiscal 2005 to the present: As of the end of FY 2018, the USPTO was composed of 12,579 federal employees, including 8,185 patent examiners, 579 trademark examiners, and 3,815 other staff.{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY17PAR.pdf|title=Performance & Accountability Report FY 17|website=USPTO|access-date=January 14, 2019|archive-date=January 15, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190115075842/https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY17PAR.pdf|url-status=live}}

US Patent Office main building.jpg | USPTO Madison Building Exterior

Interior of the US Patent and Trademark Madison Building.jpg | Interior atrium of the USPTO Madison Building

United States Patent and Trademark Office, San Jose City Hall, San Jose, California.jpg | USPTO satellite office in San Jose, California

Patent examiners make up the bulk of the employees at USPTO. They hold degrees in various scientific disciplines, but do not necessarily hold law degrees. Unlike patent examiners, trademark examiners must be licensed attorneys.{{citation needed|date=January 2019|reason=Trademark examiners are required to be licensed attorneys, as shown by consistent referral to examiners as "trademark examining attorneys" throughout the USPTO website.|https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-maintaining-trademark-registration/responding-office-actions=}}

All examiners work under a strict, "count"-based production system.{{cite web |url=http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/1700_1705.htm |title=1705 Examiner Docket, Time, and Activity Recordation [R-5] – 1700 Miscellaneous |publisher=United States Patent and Trademark Office |access-date=January 29, 2010 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100528111309/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/1700_1705.htm |archive-date=May 28, 2010 }} For every application, "counts" are earned by composing, filing, and mailing a first office action on the merits, and upon disposal of an application.

Prior to 2012, decisions of patent examiners could be appealed to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, an administrative law body of the USPTO. Decisions of the BPAI could further be appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, or a civil suit could be brought against the Commissioner of Patents in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.35 U.S.C. § 145. The United States Supreme Court may ultimately decide on a patent case. Under the America Invents Act, the BPAI was converted to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board or "PTAB".{{cite web|url=http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab_submissions_have_commenced |date=September 18, 2012 |first1=David |last1=Kappos |title=PTAB Submissions Have Commenced|website=USPTO|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170513194150/https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab_submissions_have_commenced|archive-date=May 13, 2017|url-status=live|access-date=May 6, 2018}} Similarly, decisions of trademark examiners could be appealed to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, with subsequent appeals directed to the Federal Circuit, or a civil action may also be brought.

In October 2021, President Joe Biden nominated attorney Kathi Vidal to serve as the USPTO director.{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/biden-nominates-winston-strawn-partner-kathi-vidal-lead-uspto-2021-10-26/|title=Biden nominates Winston & Strawn partner Kathi Vidal to lead USPTO|newspaper=Reuters|date=October 26, 2021|last1=Brittain|first1=Blake}} She was sworn in on April 13, 2022.{{cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-welcomes-new-director-kathi-vidal|title=USPTO Welcomes New Director Kathi Vidal|date=April 13, 2022|publisher=United States Patent and Trademark Office|access-date=April 13, 2022}} On December 16, 2022, Kathi Vidal announced that Vaishali Udupa,{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/organizational-offices/office-commissioner-patents|title=Office of the Commissioner for Patents|date=January 30, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230130150625/https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/organizational-offices/office-commissioner-patents |archive-date=January 30, 2023 }} an intellectual property attorney, engineer, and currently a top executive from Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE), will join the 13,000-person Department of Commerce agency as the new commissioner for patents effective January 17, 2023.{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/vaishali-udupa-join-uspto-new-commissioner-patents|title=Vaishali Udupa to join USPTO as new Commissioner for Patents|date=December 16, 2022|publisher=United States Patent and Trademark Office|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221216193550/https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/vaishali-udupa-join-uspto-new-commissioner-patents |access-date=June 29, 2024|archive-date=December 16, 2022 }}

For many years, Congress has "diverted" about 10% of the fees that the USPTO collected into the general treasury of the United States. In effect, this took money collected from the patent system to use for the general budget. This fee diversion has been generally opposed by patent practitioners (e.g., patent attorneys and patent agents), inventors, the USPTO,{{cite press release |publisher = United States Patent and Trademark Office |date = February 2, 2004 |url = http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/04-03.htm |title = President's proposed budget ends USPTO fee diversion in FY 2005 |access-date = November 24, 2006 |url-status = live |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070106082244/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/04-03.htm |archive-date = January 6, 2007 }} as well as former federal judge Paul R. Michel.[http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2011/07/14/interview-with-chief-judge-paul-r-michel-on-us-patent-reform/ Interview With Chief Judge Paul R. Michel On U.S. Patent Reform] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110820180554/http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2011/07/14/interview-with-chief-judge-paul-r-michel-on-us-patent-reform/ |date=August 20, 2011 }}, Intellectual Property Watch, July 19, 2011. Consulted on August 8, 2011. These stakeholders would rather use the funds to improve the patent office and patent system, such as by implementing the USPTO's 21st Century Strategic Plan.{{cite web |url = http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/strat21/ |title = Strategic Plan for the 21st Century |access-date = November 24, 2006 |date = February 24, 2006 |publisher = United States Patent and Trademark Office |url-status = dead |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20061225041141/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/strat21/ |archive-date = December 25, 2006 }} The last six annual budgets of the George W. Bush administration did not propose to divert any USPTO fees, and the first budget of the Barack Obama administration continued this practice,{{cite web |url=http://www.patentdocs.org/2009/05/docs-at-bio-panel-offers-suggestions-for-fixing-the-uspto.html |title=Docs at BIO: Panel Offers Suggestions for Fixing the USPTO – Updated |first=Donald |last=Zuhn |publisher=PatentDocs.org |date=May 20, 2009 |access-date=May 24, 2009 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090523210937/http://www.patentdocs.org/2009/05/docs-at-bio-panel-offers-suggestions-for-fixing-the-uspto.html |archive-date=May 23, 2009 }} as well as the second budget of the Trump administration;{{Cite web |date=May 23, 2017 |title=USPTO gets $3.6 billion in President's FY 2018 budget, avoids fee diversion |url=https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/05/23/uspto-3-6-billion-presidents-fy-2018-budget-avoids-fee-diversion/id=83633/ |access-date=May 27, 2022 |website=IPWatchdog.com {{!}} Patents & Patent Law |language=en}} however, stakeholders continue to press for a permanent end to fee diversion.{{Cite web |date=May 17, 2016 |title=Diversion of USPTO user fees is a tax on innovation |url=https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2016/05/17/diversion-uspto-user-fees-tax-innovation/id=69070/ |access-date=May 27, 2022 |website=IPWatchdog.com {{!}} Patents & Patent Law |language=en}}

The discussion of which party can appropriate the fees is more than a financial question. Patent fees represent a policy lever that influences both the number of applications submitted to the office as well as their quality.{{Cite journal |doi=10.1111/j.1468-0084.2011.00638.x |title=On the price elasticity of demand for patents |first1=Gaétan |last1=de Rassenfosse |first2=Bruno |last2=van Pottelsberghe |journal=Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics |volume=74 |issue=1 |pages=58–77 |date=2012 |s2cid=43660064 |url=https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/53960/1/wp08031.pdf |access-date=February 16, 2021 |archive-date=August 9, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170809032223/https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/53960/1/wp08031.pdf |url-status=live}}{{Cite journal |last1=de Rassenfosse |first1=Gaétan |author-link=Gaétan de Rassenfosse |last2=Jaffe |first2=Adam |date=2018 |title=Are patent fees effective at weeding out low-quality patents? |url=http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/290598/files/15_01.pdf |journal=Journal of Economics & Management Strategy |volume=27 |issue=1 |pages=134–148 |doi=10.1111/jems.12219 |s2cid=158435358}}

File:FirstUSpatent.jpg

File:Inventors Hall of Fame in Madison Bldg at USPTO.jpg

• On July 31, 1790, the first U.S. patent was issued to Samuel Hopkins for an improvement "in the making of Pot ash and Pearl ash by a new Apparatus and Process". This patent was signed by President George Washington.
• The X-Patents (the first 9,957 (approximately),{{cite web | url=https://www.govinfo.gov/features/anniversary-first-patent | title=Anniversary of the First Patent Issued in the United States }} issued between 1790 and 1836) were destroyed by a fire; fewer than 3,000 of those have been recovered and re-issued with numbers that include an "X". The X generally appears at the end of the numbers hand-written on full-page patent images; however, in patent collections and for search purposes, the X is considered to be the patent type – analogous to the "D" of design patents – and appears at the beginning of the number. The X distinguishes the patents from those issued after the fire, which began again with patent number 1.
• Each year, the PTO issues over 150,000 patents to companies and individuals worldwide. {{As of|2011|12|df=US}}, the PTO had granted 8,743,423 patents and received 16,020,302 applications.{{cite web | url = http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/h_counts.htm | title = U.S. Patent Activity Calendar Years 1790 to the Present | access-date = December 12, 2012 | date = December 12, 2012 | publisher = United States Patent and Trademark Office | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20121202121415/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/h_counts.htm | archive-date = December 2, 2012 }}
• On June 19, 2018, the 10 millionth U.S. patent was issued to Joseph Marron for invention of a "Coherent LADAR [System] Using Intra-Pixel Quadrature Detection" to improve laser detection and ranging (LADAR).{{Cite web |url=https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/united-states-issues-patent-number-10000000 |title=United States Issues Patent Number 10,000,000 |date=June 19, 2018 |access-date=June 21, 2018 |archive-date=June 19, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180619141725/https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/united-states-issues-patent-number-10000000 |url-status=live }} The patent was the first to receive the newly redesigned patent cover. It was signed by President Donald Trump during a special ceremony at the Oval Office.{{cite tweet|number=1009188142249906176|user=uspto|title=Today, @POTUS signed patent ten...|date=June 19, 2018}}
• In February 2024, the USPTO issued a new guideline relating to obtaining a patent as per earlier recommendation by Biden's administration. The guideline states that; to obtain a patent, a real person, not AI, must have made a “significant contribution” to the invention and that only a human being can be named as an inventor on a patent.{{Cite web |last=Fung |first=Brian |date=February 14, 2024 |title=Only real people, not AI, can patent inventions, US government says {{!}} CNN Business |url=https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/14/tech/billions-in-ai-patents-get-new-regulations/index.html |access-date=February 15, 2024 |website=CNN |language=en}}

{{Vertical bar chart

| full_name = Days since preceding millionth patent filed at the USPTO

| color_12=blue

| type=number of patents

|1911|27419|1932|7583|1955|8394|1976|7907|1991|5194|1999|3185|2006|2261|2011|2009|2015|1330|2018|1169|2021|1057|2024|1120}}

The USPTO examines applications for trademark registration, which can be filed under five different filing bases: use in commerce, intent to use, foreign application, foreign registration, or international registration.{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-getting-started/trademark-basics/basis-filing|title=Basis for Filing|last=Trademarks|website=USPTO|language=en-US|access-date=January 14, 2019|archive-date=January 15, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190115075806/https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-getting-started/trademark-basics/basis-filing|url-status=live}} If approved, the trademarks are registered on either the Principal Register or the Supplemental Register, depending upon whether the mark meets the appropriate distinctiveness criteria. This federal system governs goods and services distributed via interstate commerce, and operates alongside state level trademark registration systems.{{cite web

|url = http://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/trademark/trademark-registration/state-trademark-info-links.html

|title = State Trademark Information

|access-date = February 11, 2008

|date = February 11, 2008

|publisher = FindLaw For Small Business

|url-status = live

|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080302103739/http://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/trademark/trademark-registration/state-trademark-info-links.html

|archive-date = March 2, 2008

}}{{cite web

|url = http://www.uspto.gov

|title = Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)

|access-date = February 11, 2008

|date = February 11, 2008

|publisher = United States Patent and Trademark Office

|url-status = live

|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20100903003911/http://www.uspto.gov/

|archive-date = September 3, 2010

}} Note: click on "Trademarks" then click on "TESS" tab.{{cite web

|url = http://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/trademark-faqs

|title = Trademark FAQs

|access-date = September 14, 2015

|publisher = United States Patent and Trademark Office

|url-status = live

|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150912050501/http://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/trademark-faqs

|archive-date = September 12, 2015

}}

Trademark applications have grown substantially in recent years, jumping from 296,490 new applications in 2000,{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2000PAR.pdf|title=USPTO Annual Report FY2000|website=USPTO.gov|access-date=January 14, 2019|archive-date=April 24, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180424032615/https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2000PAR.pdf|url-status=live}} to 345,000 new applications in 2014, to 458,103 new applications in 2018.{{Cite web|url=https://www.erikpelton.com/uspto-received-more-than-458000-trademark-applications-in-2018-a-new-record-but-slower-growth/|title=USPTO received more than 458,000 trademark applications in 2018 – a new record, but slower growth|last=Erik|date=January 6, 2019|website=Erik M Pelton & Associates, PLLC|language=en-US|access-date=January 14, 2019}} Recent growth has been driven partially by growing numbers of trademark applications originating in China; trademark applications from China have grown more than 12-fold since 2013, and in 2017, one in every nine trademark applications reviewed by the U.S. Trademark Office originated in China.{{Cite news|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/flood-of-trademark-applications-fromchinaalarms-u-s-officials-1525521600|title=Flood of Trademark Applications From China Alarms U.S. Officials|last=Gershman|first=Jacob|date=May 5, 2018|work=Wall Street Journal|access-date=January 14, 2019|language=en-US|issn=0099-9660}}

Since 2008, the Trademark Office has hosted a National Trademark Expo every two years, billing it as "a free, family-friendly event designed to educate the public about trademarks and their importance in the global marketplace."{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/trademark/trademark-updates-and-announcements/about-usptos-national-trademark-expo|title=About the USPTO's National Trademark Exposition|last=Trademarks|website=USPTO|language=en-US|access-date=January 14, 2019|archive-date=January 15, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190115075840/https://www.uspto.gov/trademark/trademark-updates-and-announcements/about-usptos-national-trademark-expo|url-status=live}} The Expo features celebrity speakers such as Anson Williams (of the television show Happy Days){{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/trademark/trademark-updates-and-announcements/2014-national-trademark-expo|title=2014 National Trademark Expo|last=Trademarks|website=USPTO|language=en-US|access-date=January 14, 2019|archive-date=January 15, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190115075757/https://www.uspto.gov/trademark/trademark-updates-and-announcements/2014-national-trademark-expo|url-status=live}} and basketball player Kareem Abdul-Jabbar{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/events/2018-national-trademark-expo|title=2018 National Trademark Exposition|website=USPTO|language=en-US|access-date=January 14, 2019|archive-date=January 15, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190115075847/https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/events/2018-national-trademark-expo|url-status=live}} and has numerous trademark-holding companies as exhibitors. Before the 2009 National Trademark Expo, the Trademark Office designed and launched a kid-friendly trademark mascot known as T. Markey, who appears as an anthropomorphized registered trademark symbol.{{Cite web|url=https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20141203/15321529320/uspto-acts-like-three-letter-agency-redacts-bunch-stuff-about-its-kid-friendly-t-markey-character.shtml|title=USPTO Acts Like A Three-Letter Agency, Redacts A Bunch Of Stuff About Its Kid-Friendly 'T. Markey' Character|last=Cushing |first=Tim |website=Techdirt |date=December 4, 2014 |access-date=January 14, 2019|archive-date=January 15, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190115132504/https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20141203/15321529320/uspto-acts-like-three-letter-agency-redacts-bunch-stuff-about-its-kid-friendly-t-markey-character.shtml|url-status=live}} T. Markey is featured prominently on the Kids section of the USPTO website, alongside fellow IP mascots Ms. Pat Pending (with her robot cat GeaRS) and Mark Trademan.{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/kids/kids.html|title=USPTO Kids|website=USPTO|access-date=January 14, 2019|archive-date=December 3, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181203190038/https://www.uspto.gov/kids/kids.html|url-status=live}}

In 2020, trademark applications marked the sharpest declines and inclines in American history. During the spring, COVID-19 lockdowns led to reduced filings, which then increased in July 2020 to exceed the previous year. August 2020 was subsequently the highest month of trademark filings in the history of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.{{Cite web|title=USPTO Director Andrei Iancu speaks on pandemic's effect on intellectual property|url=https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2020/09/uspto-director-andrei-iancu-speaks-on-pandemics-effect-on-intell/|website=americanbar.org|publisher=American Bar Association|date=October 30, 2020|access-date=October 2, 2020|archive-date=October 11, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201011043428/https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2020/09/uspto-director-andrei-iancu-speaks-on-pandemics-effect-on-intell/|url-status=live}}

The USPTO only allows certain qualified persons to practice before the USPTO. Practice includes filing of patent and trademark applications on behalf of individuals and companies, prosecuting the patent and trademark applications, and participating in administrative appeals and other proceedings before the PTO examiners, examining attorneys and boards. The USPTO sets its own standards for who may practice. Any person who practices patent law before the USPTO must become a registered patent attorney or agent. A patent agent is a person who has passed the USPTO registration examination (the "patent bar") but has not passed any state bar exam to become a licensed attorney; a patent attorney is a person who has passed both a state bar and the patent bar and is in good standing as an attorney.{{cite web |url=http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/attorney.htm |title=General Information Concerning Patents: Attorneys and Agents |publisher=United States Patent and Trademark Office |access-date=January 29, 2010 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100123220237/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/attorney.htm |archive-date=January 23, 2010 }} A patent agent can only act in a representative capacity in patent matters presented to the USPTO, and may not represent a patent holder or applicant in a court of law. To be eligible for taking the patent bar exam, a candidate must possess a degree in "engineering or physical science or the equivalent of such a degree". Any person who practices trademark law before the USPTO must be an active member in good standing of the highest court of any state.{{cite web |title=Becoming a trademark practitioner |url=https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/patent-and-trademark-practitioners/becoming-trademark-practitioner |website=United States Patent and Trademark Office |publisher=USPTO |access-date=December 5, 2018 |archive-date=December 6, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181206001609/https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/patent-and-trademark-practitioners/becoming-trademark-practitioner |url-status=live }}

The United States allows any citizen from any country to sit for the patent bar (if he/she has the requisite technical background).{{cite web|url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/37/11/7|title=37 CFR 11.7 – Requirements for registration.|website=LII / Legal Information Institute|access-date=May 6, 2018}} Only Canada has a reciprocity agreement with the United States that confers upon a patent agent similar rights.{{cite web |url=http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/foia/oed/legal/legal11.pdf |title=Decision on Petition Under 37 C.F.R. § 10.2(c) |date=May 9, 2003 |access-date=January 29, 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100923061312/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/foia/oed/legal/legal11.pdf |archive-date=September 23, 2010 }}

An unrepresented inventor may file a patent application and prosecute it on his or her own behalf (pro se). If it appears to a patent examiner that an inventor filing a pro se application is not familiar with the proper procedures of the Patent Office, the examiner may suggest that the filing party obtain representation by a registered patent attorney or patent agent.Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, [http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep_e8r3_0400.pdf Chapter 400] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051127114214/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep_e8r3_0400.pdf |date=November 27, 2005 }} The patent examiner cannot recommend a specific attorney or agent, but the Patent Office does post a list of those who are registered.{{cite web |url=https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/ |title=Patent Attorney/Agent Search |publisher=Office of Enrollment and Discipline, United States Patent and Trademark Office |access-date=October 17, 2011 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111015111546/https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/ |archive-date=October 15, 2011 }}

While the inventor of a relatively simple-to-describe invention may well be able to produce an adequate specification and detailed drawings, there remains language complexity in what is claimed, either in the particular claim language of a utility application, or in the manner in which drawings are presented in a design application. There is also skill required when searching for prior art that is used to support the application and to prevent applying for a patent for something that may be unpatentable. A patent examiner will make special efforts to help pro se inventors understand the process but the failure to adequately understand or respond to an office action from the USPTO can endanger the inventor's rights, and may lead to abandonment of the application.

The USPTO accepts patent applications filed in electronic form. Inventors or their patent agents/attorneys can file applications as Adobe PDF documents. Filing fees can be paid by credit card or by a USPTO "deposit account".

File:PSF at USPTO Madison Bldg.jpg

The USPTO web site provides free electronic copies of issued patents and patent applications as multiple-page TIFF (graphic) documents. The site also provides Boolean search and analysis tools.{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20120309022543/http://marketsandpatents.com/bulletin/IPB-02152012.html Nowotarski, Mark, "Searching the USPTO patent database", Insurance IP Bulletin, February 2012]}}

The USPTO's free distribution service only distributes the patent documents as a set of TIFF files.{{cite web|url=http://www.uspto.gov/patft/help/images.htm|title=PatFT Full-Text Images|website=USPTO|access-date=May 6, 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130901235123/http://www.uspto.gov/patft/help/images.htm|archive-date=September 1, 2013}} Numerous free and commercial services provide patent documents in other formats, such as Adobe PDF and CPC.

The USPTO has been criticized for granting patents for impossible or absurd, already known, or arguably obvious inventions.Philip E. Ross, [https://www.forbes.com/global/2000/0529/0311090a.html Patently Absurd] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170729210452/https://www.forbes.com/global/2000/0529/0311090a.html |date=July 29, 2017 }}, Forbes.com, May 29, 2000. Economists have documented that, although the USPTO makes mistakes when granting patents, these mistakes might be less prominent than some might believe.{{Cite journal|title= Low-Quality Patents in the Eye of the Beholder: Evidence from Multiple Examiners|last1=de Rassenfosse|first1=Gaetan|url= https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewaa026|last2=Griffiths|first2=William|last3=Jaffe|first3=Adam|last4=Webster|first4=Elizabeth|date=2020|journal=Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization|volume=37|issue=3|pages=607–636|doi=10.1093/jleo/ewaa026}}

• {{US patent|5,443,036}}, "Method of exercising a cat", covers having a cat chase the beam from a laser pointer. The patent has been criticized as being obvious.{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/21/business/21scene.html|author=Hal H. Varian|title=Patent Protection Gone Awry|date=October 21, 2004|work=The New York Times|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150528062022/http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/21/business/21scene.html|archive-date=May 28, 2015}}{{cite web|url=https://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2002/10/55831|title=Stop the Patent Process Madness|date=October 21, 2002|author=Lauren Weinstein|author-link=Lauren Weinstein (activist)|work=Wired News|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140119134737/http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2002/10/55831|archive-date=January 19, 2014}}
• {{US patent|6,004,596}}, "Sealed crustless sandwich", issued in 1999, covers the design of a sandwich with crimped edges.{{cite news|author=Sara Schaefer Muñoz|date=April 5, 2005|work=The Wall Street Journal|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB111266108673297874|title=Patent No. 6,004,596: Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170710051120/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB111266108673297874|archive-date=July 10, 2017}} All claims of the patent were canceled by the PTO upon reexamination.Reexamination certificate no. US 6,004,596 C1, September 25, 2007, retrieved from USPTO [http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair Public Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR)] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090114020637/http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair |date=January 14, 2009 }}, December 1, 2008 (request PAIR entry for Reexamination Control Number 90/005949 as "Application Number").
• {{US patent|6,025,810}}, "Hyper-light-speed antenna", an antenna that sends signals faster than the speed of light. According to the description in the patent, "The present invention takes a transmission of energy, and instead of sending it through normal time and space, it pokes a small hole into another dimension, thus, sending the energy through a place which allows transmission of energy to exceed the speed of light."{{US patent|6,025,810}}, col. 1, lines 30–34.
• {{US patent|6,368,227}}, "Method of swinging on a swing", issued April 9, 2002,{{cite web|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2178-boy-takes-swing-at-us-patents.html|publisher=New Scientist|date=April 17, 2002|author=Jeff Hecht|title=Boy takes swing at US patents|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110514000604/http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2178-boy-takes-swing-at-us-patents.html|archive-date=May 14, 2011}}{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/13/business/patents-patent-office-faces-huge-backlogs-extremely-technical-inventions-absurd.html|work=The New York Times|title=Patents; The Patent Office faces huge backlogs, extremely technical inventions, and absurd ones.|author=Teresa Riordan|date=May 13, 2002|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170316153058/http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/13/business/patents-patent-office-faces-huge-backlogs-extremely-technical-inventions-absurd.html|archive-date=March 16, 2017}} was granted to a seven-year-old boy, whose father, a patent attorney, wanted to demonstrate how the patent system worked to his son who was five years old at the time of the application. The PTO initially rejected it due to prior art, but eventually issued the patent. Upon reexamination all claims of the patent were canceled by the PTO.Reexamination certificate no. US 6,368,227 C1, July 1, 2003, retrieved from USPTO [http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair Public Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR)] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090114020637/http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair |date=January 14, 2009 }}, August 22, 2008
• {{US patent|6,960,975}}, "Space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state", describes an anti-gravity device. In November 2005, the USPTO was criticized by physicists for granting it. The journal Nature first highlighted this patent issued for a device that presumably amounts to a perpetual motion machine, defying the laws of physics.{{cite journal

| last = Ball | first = Philip | date = November 10, 2005

| title = Antigravity craft slips past patent officers | journal = Nature | volume = 438 | issue = 7065 | page = 139

| pmid = 16280998 | doi = 10.1038/438139a

| bibcode = 2005Natur.438Q.139B | doi-access = free }}{{cite news | author = United Press International | title = Patent issued for anti-gravity device | url = http://www.physorg.com/news8042.html | publisher = Phyorg.com | year = 2005 | access-date = November 24, 2006 | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20061210231450/http://www.physorg.com/news8042.html | archive-date = December 10, 2006 }}{{cite news | author = Brian Handwerk | title = Antigravity Machine Patent Draws Physicists' Ire | url = http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/11/1111_051111_junk_patent.html | publisher = National Geographic News | date = November 11, 2005 | access-date = November 24, 2006 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20061114085057/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/11/1111_051111_junk_patent.html | archive-date = November 14, 2006 }}An [https://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/index.php?feed=Science&article=UPI-1-20051109-13140400-bc-us-antigravity.xml untraceable link] was also included here as an additional reference.{{Full citation needed|date=January 2010}} {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051204041457/https://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/index.php?feed=Science&article=UPI-1-20051109-13140400-bc-us-antigravity.xml |date=December 4, 2005 }} The device comprises a particular electrically superconducting shield and electromagnetic generating device. The examiner allowed the claims because the design of the shield and device was novel and not obvious.{{cite web

|url = http://sherinianlaw.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/11079670.pdf

|title = Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)

|access-date = September 5, 2014

|author = Ramon M Barrera (examiner)

|date = June 7, 2005

|work = 11/079,670 Space Vehicle Propelled by the Pressure of Inflationary Vacuum State

|publisher = United States Patent and Trademark Office

|page = 2

|url-status = live

|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160201163821/http://sherinianlaw.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/11079670.pdf

|archive-date = February 1, 2016

}} Note: Navigate to the 'Image File Wrapper' to find the file; download and open with a PDF reader. The specific passage from the document follows: "The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance: None of the prior art of record taught or disclosed the claimed superconducting shield and electromagnetic field generating means structure." In situations such as this where a substantial question of patentability is raised after a patent is issued, the Commissioner of the Patent Office can order a reexamination of the patent.

• {{US trademark|77139082}}, "Cloud Computing" for Dell, covering "custom manufacture of computer hardware for use in data centers and mega-scale computing environments for others", was allowed by a trademark attorney on July 8, 2008. Cloud computing is a generic term that could define technology infrastructure for years to come, which had been in general use at the time of the application.{{cite web|url=http://www.cio.com/article/440863/Dell_Tries_to_Trademark_cloud_Computing_|title=Dell Tries to Trademark 'cloud Computing'|first=Agam|last=Shah|website=cio.com|access-date=May 6, 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140416183718/http://www.cio.com/article/440863/Dell_Tries_to_Trademark_cloud_Computing_|archive-date=April 16, 2014}} The application was rejected on August 12, 2008, as descriptive and generic.{{cite web|url=http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/Dell-Cloud-Computing-Trademark-Rejected/|title=Dell Cloud Computing Trademark Rejected|website=eweek.com|date=August 19, 2008|access-date=May 6, 2018}}
• {{US trademark|75215401}}, "Netbook" for Psion, covering "laptop computers" was registered on November 21, 2000. Although the company discontinued the netBook line in November 2003 and allowed the trademark to become genericized through use by journalists and vendors (products marketed as 'netbooks' include the Dell Inspiron Mini Series, Asus eeePC, HP Mini 1000, MSI Wind Netbook and others), USPTO subsequently rejected a number of trademarks citing a "likelihood of confusion" under section 2(d), including 'G NETBOOK' ({{US trademark|77527311}} rejected October 31, 2008), MSI's 'WIND NETBOOK' ({{US trademark|}}) and Coby Electronics' 'COBY NETBOOK' ({{US trademark|77590174}}) rejected January 13, 2009. Psion also delivered a batch of cease-and-desist letters on December 23, 2008, relating to the genericized trademark.{{Cite web|url=http://www.mtpt.co.uk/2008/12/a-netbook-by-any-other-name-or-how-psion-is-going-discover-you-have-to-use-it-or-lose-it.html|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20090205122433/http://www.mtpt.co.uk/2008/12/a-netbook-by-any-other-name-or-how-psion-is-going-discover-you-have-to-use-it-or-lose-it.html|url-status=dead|title=A netbook by any other name, or how Psion is going discover you have to use it or lose it|archivedate=February 5, 2009}}

{{Main|Backlog of unexamined patent applications}}

{{multiple image

| total_width = 450

| image1 = US patents 1790-2008.png

| caption1 = U.S. patents granted, 1790–2010{{Citation | url = http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/h_counts.htm | title = U.S. Patent Activity 1790 to the Present | publisher = USPTO | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20121202121415/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/h_counts.htm | archive-date = December 2, 2012 }}.

| image2 = 1976- United States utility patents issued, by year - bar chart.svg

| caption2 = More U.S. utility patents have been issued in the most recent thirty years than in the first 200 years in which they were issued (1790–1990).

}}

The USPTO has been criticized for taking an inordinate amount of time in examining patent applications. This is particularly true in the fast-growing area{{Update after|2010|11|16}} of business method patents. As of 2005, patent examiners in the business method area were still examining patent applications filed in 2001.{{Citation needed|date=January 2010}}

The delay was attributed by spokesmen for the Patent Office to a combination of a sudden increase in business method patent filings after the 1998 State Street Bank decision, the unfamiliarity of patent examiners with the business and financial arts (e.g., banking, insurance, stock trading etc.), and the issuance of a number of controversial patents (e.g., {{US patent|5,960,411}} "Amazon one click patent") in the business method area.

Effective August 2006, the USPTO introduced an accelerated patent examination procedure in an effort to allow inventors a speedy evaluation of an application with a final disposition within twelve months. The procedure requires additional information to be submitted with the application and also includes an interview with the examiner.{{cite web|url=http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/accelerated/|title=Accelerated Examination |website=USPTO|access-date=May 6, 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090916021707/http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/accelerated/|archive-date=September 16, 2009}} The first accelerated patent was granted on March 15, 2007, with a six-month issuance time.[http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/07-13.htm USPTO grants first patent under accelerated review option] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070428003136/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/07-13.htm |date=April 28, 2007 }} Press Release

As of the end of 2008, there were 1,208,076 patent applications pending at the Patent Office. At the end of 1997, the number of applications pending was 275,295. Therefore, over those eleven years there was a 439% increase in the number of pending applications.Gene Quinn, [http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/11/21/how-to-fix-the-uspto/ How to Fix the USPTO] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090327065446/http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/11/21/how-to-fix-the-uspto/ |date=March 27, 2009 }}, IPWatchdog, November 21, 2008. Consulted on December 6, 2008.

December 2012 data showed that there was 597,579 unexamined patent applications in the backlog.{{cite web |url=http://www.uspto.gov/dashboards/patents/main.dashxml |title=United States Patent and Trademark Office |access-date=February 23, 2013 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130220100513/http://www.uspto.gov/dashboards/patents/main.dashxml |archive-date=February 20, 2013 }} December 2012 Patents Data During the four years since 2009, more than a 50% reduction was achieved. First action pendency was reported as 19.2 months.

In 2012, the USPTO initiated an internal investigation into allegations of fraud by employees taking advantage of its remote work policies. Investigators discovered that some patent examiners had lied about the hours they had worked, but high level officials prevented access to computer records, thus limiting the number of employees who could be punished.{{cite news |last1=Rein |first1=Lisa |title=Patent office filters out worst telework abuses in report to its watchdog |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/patent-office-filters-out-worst-telework-abuses-in-report-to-watchdog/2014/08/10/cd5f442e-1e4d-11e4-82f9-2cd6fa8da5c4_story.html |newspaper=The Washington Post | date=August 10, 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140812014557/http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/patent-office-filters-out-worst-telework-abuses-in-report-to-watchdog/2014/08/10/cd5f442e-1e4d-11e4-82f9-2cd6fa8da5c4_story.html |archive-date=August 12, 2014}}

• Confederate Patent Office
• Criticism of the United States government § Criticism of agencies
• Electronic Filing System (USPTO)
• Ex Parte Quayle
• Google Patents
• John Ruggles
• Invention Secrecy Act
• NASA spinoff
• National Inventors Hall of Fame
• Office of Independent Inventor Programs (1999)
• Old Patent Office Building
• Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR)
• Patent model
• Patent Office Professional Association (POPA)
• Science and technology in the United States
• Technological history of the United States
• Timeline of United States discoveries
• Timeline of United States inventions
• Yankee ingenuity
• 1836 U.S. Patent Office fire
• 1877 U.S. Patent Office fire

{{Reflist|refs=

{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY24AFR.pdf|title=FY 2024 Agency Financial Report|website=USPTO|access-date=February 15, 2025|archive-date=February 5, 2025|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250205211814/https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY24AFR.pdf|url-status=live}}

{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY22AFR.pdf|title=FY 2022 Agency Financial Report|website=USPTO|access-date=October 25, 2023|archive-date=May 16, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230516135105/https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY22AFR.pdf|url-status=live}}

{{Cite web|url=https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf|title=Performance & Accountability Report FY 2021|website=USPTO|access-date=June 22, 2023|archive-date=June 22, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220622005737/https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf|url-status=live}}

}}

• {{cite book |title=The Patent Office Pony: A History of the Early Patent Office |first1=Kenneth W. |last1=Dobyns |date=November 1994 |page=249 |publisher=Sergeant Kirkland's Museum and Historical Society |place=Fredericksburg, Virginia |edition=1st |isbn=0-9632137-4-1}} {{ISBN|978-0-9632137-4-7}}.
• {{cite web |last=Schacht |first=Wendy H. |title=U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Appropriations Process: A Brief Explanation |url=http://ipmall.info/hosted_resources/crs/RS20906_110106.pdf |publisher=Congressional Research Service |access-date=April 22, 2011 |date=January 6, 2011}}

{{Commons category|United States Patent and Trademark Office}}

• {{Official website|https://www.uspto.gov/}}
• [https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/patent-and-trademark-office USPTO] in the Federal Register
• [https://search.uspto.gov/search?query=&op=Search&affiliate=web-sdmg-uspto.gov Searches] (USPTO)
• [https://tsdr.uspto.gov/ Trademark Applications and Registrations Retrieval (TARR)] search by trademark serial number or registration number (USPTO)
• [https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/organizational-offices/office-general-counsel/office-enrollment-and-discipline-oed Office of Enrollment & Discipline (OED)]
• [https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/support-centers/patent-and-trademark-resource-centers-ptrcs Patent and Trademark Depository Library Program]
• [https://www.stopfakes.gov/article?id=Small-Business-Administration Stopfakes.gov Small Business Resources]
• [https://search.library.wisc.edu/database/UWI03650 Patent Full-Text and Full-Page Image Databases] (USPTO)
• {{Gutenberg author | id=25489|name=United States Patent Office}}
• {{Internet Archive author |search=("Patent Office" OR "Patent and Trademark Office" OR "USPTO")}}

{{United States Department of Commerce}}

{{Authority control}}

Category:Patent offices

Category:Intellectual property organizations

Category:United States trademark law

Category:Agencies of the United States government

Patent and Trademark Office

Patent and Trademark Office

Category:International Searching and Preliminary Examining Authorities